Psychological variables associated with the effect of VR during wound care

- ACRONYM

- hypothesis

VR turned out to be promising as adjunct non-pharmacological intervention during wound dressing changes. Because the evidence for VR as pain relief is limited, more high-quality studies are needed to investigate the effect of VR on procedural pain. This study focuses on both the effectiveness and efficacy of VR.

VR is effective in reducing pain, when there are both statistically and clinically significant differences between the VAS-scores of overall pain during care as usual with VR and care as usual.

- Secondary outcome

- The satisfaction with the use of VR is meaningful when the VAS-score of satisfaction with care as usual with VR is not statistically and clinically significantly lower than the VAS-score of satisfaction with care as usual.
- The identification of independent variables associated with the expected statistically and clinically significant differences in pain and satisfaction, between care as usual with VR and care as usual.
- The number of milligrams sedation and/or analgesics used during care as usual with VR compared to care as usual.
- The number of patients reporting side-effects (like nausea) as a consequence of the use of VR. If patients using VR report significant more side effects than patients not using VR (care as usual), we have to investigate the reason of these (game choice / equipment, other).
- The description of the user friendliness of the VR-equipment with patients and medical professionals.